[JoeT777]

God rules, instructs and sanctifies His people through His Church. Under her teaching office, the Catholic Church preserves the Word of God. She is the custodian, keeper, dispenser and interpreter of teachings of Christ. And she accomplishes this under the protection of the Holy Spirit.

I couldn’t agree more. I particularly like his last paragraph.

On another matter, I think Fritz Tuttle is an apologist with the Legion of Mary, not a theologian. I could be wrong; I’ve only run across some of his work a few times.

JoeT

[gromitt82]

You are right. And I was wrong. He is at present with the Legion of Mary. Thanks for the correction

[arcura]

gromitt82,
Very good.
By the way, I have not heard from you lately and I've lost your e-mail address.
Please send me a e-mail so I will again have it.
Pax Christi,
Fred

[gromitt82]

gromitt82,
Very good.
By the way, I have not heard from you lately and I've lost your e-mail address.
Please send me a e-mail so I will again have it.
Pax Christi,
Fred

My e-mail address is: [email protected] and the reason you haven't heard from me is because I keep sending you mails which are returned. I still use the same address I had which is: [email protected]

Have you changed it?
Claude

[galveston]

Somehow you’ve gotten the wrong impression. Catholics hold that the Mystical Body of Christ is the Church, it includes the lay, priests, bishops, and Pope. The population consists of those baptized, in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit; both sinners and the holy are included. This is only the beginning of an individual’s journey; it doesn’t offer any assurance of being ‘saved’. That type of theology is Luther’s, not Christ’s.

JoeT

So because I am not a member of the RCC I am NOT saved?

Wrong!

How do I know that I am saved?

John 1:12-13
12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
(KJV)

Rom 8:14-16
14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
(KJV)

These and other Scriptures prove that we CAN know that we are saved.

I know, do you?

[JoeT777]

So because I am not a member of the RCC I am NOT saved?

Wrong!

How do I know that I am saved?


John 1:12-13
12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
(KJV)

Rom 8:14-16
14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
(KJV)

These and other Scriptures prove that we CAN know that we are saved.

I know, do you?

I can't read - so I can't be saved? I guess if you rationalize away a few verses I could get the Bible to say that "JoeT has hair on top of his head." Which of course is as far from the truth as you can get.


More important, you apparently didn’t read what I said, but yet you want to argue about what I didn’t say. Ok, let’s argue; if you argue as good as you read this ought to be easy.


What was said was that there is no ‘assurance’ of being saved. Simply bearing witness doesn’t do it either. It’s God’s judgment over a life’s merit in its perseverance with fear and trembling working out its salvation. (Cf. Phil 2:12)


JoeT

[galveston]

I can't read - so I can't be saved? I guess if you rationalize away a few verses I could get the Bible to say that "JoeT has hair on top of his head." Which of course is as far from the truth as you can get.


More important, you apparently didn’t read what I said, but yet you want to argue about what I didn’t say. Ok, let’s argue; if you argue as good as you read this ought to be easy.


What was said was that there is no ‘assurance’ of being saved. Simply bearing witness doesn’t do it either. It’s God’s judgment over a life’s merit in its perseverance with fear and trembling working out its salvation. (Cf. Phil 2:12)


JoeT

Sorry Joe, I DID read what you wrote, and it is clear that you believe that the only way to Heaven is through the RCC.

Go back to my previous post and think about the Scripture. Or does Scripture matter?

BTW, It isn't Luther's theology, it is Biblical theology.

As to Phil 2:12, that cannot mean that we are saved by works, because the same Paul that wrote phil. 2:12 ALSO wrote:

Eph 2:8-9
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
(KJV)

This is a case of needing the Holy Spirit to understand the Word. Paul also wrote:

2 Tim 2:15
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
(KJV)

[JoeT777]

Sorry Joe, I DID read what you wrote, and it is clear that you believe that the only way to Heaven is through the RCC.

Go back to my previous post and think about the Scripture. Or does Scripture matter?

I wondered why you didn't provide the quote. It was because I didn't say 'the only way to heaven is through the RCC'. I will argue that it is like trying to pass a camel through the eye of a needle. But, it would have been wrong for me to make that assertion. What I did say was, “We believe that the fullness of faith resides in the Church. So to answer your question directly, yes unity in its fullest can only be realized in the Catholic Church.”

As to Phil 2:12, that cannot mean that we are saved by works, because the same Paul that wrote phil. 2:12 ALSO wrote:

Maybe not the way you read the bible it cannot mean 'saved by works'. But, even if we take your gloss of the bible, it certainly doesn't say 'assurance of salvation' without work.

BTW, It isn't Luther's theology, it is Biblical theology.

Oh, but this line of argument is Luther's; it's the same perversion of Scripture.

I'm of the opinion that Luther was simply mad, demented or possessed – maybe all three. Most every Catholic scholar would mention one or several of the less scandalous stories about Luther; of course, probably out of charity; connections to the man's stability were seldom made. (It seems the tentacles of political correctness are everywhere).

Let's put Luther under a little scrutiny? Comparatively even though they may have a repudiated past we most always see Saints make a real and lasting change or move to a permanent holiness. Let's see how Luther measure up. Generally speaking, in Luther, I see right the opposite, that is a move towards immorality. This was the issue with Henry VIII's bigamy and his devoice; it seems that Luther proposed that bigamy was more expedient than divorce. While it might raise a flag, it's not too big a deal. What then should we make of the case of bigamy dealing with Phillip of Hesse? Luther reneged on certain assurances given the Pope Leo X, to his Bishop, Bishop Scultetus, and to Emperor Charles. Why? What's the story behind this? Chivalry hadn't died in 1500, not yet anyway – some would say that chivalry moved along with a more 'rationalized' morality shortly after Luther; you might say see moral truth becoming a shivaree of mendacity. What do we make of Luther's Evangel? Are there grounds to suggest that there is a psychological problem with Luther's sanity? Luther's writings are complete with battles with the devil – funny? Take it serious - did he lose the battle with the devil? Luther had a funny outlook on the sacrament of marriage, especially for somebody who was a Catholic priest, who claimed to be a profit (I wonder for whose profit he prognosticates for – the good spirits or the bad guys?)

I'll go a step further and suggest that from the onset Luther's goal was to destroy the Church. There was no attempt at 'reform' or 'correction.' From a gloss we can see schism early in Luther's career. His main goal was to tear down what Christ had built up. Considering himself a great prophet on the order of Moses; no doubt aligned with the great deceiver, openly declared his desire to disrupt the Mass:

If I succeed in doing away with the Mass, then I shall believe I have completely conquered the Pope. On the Mass, as on a rock, the whole of the Papacy is based, with its monasteries, bishoprics, colleges, altars, services and doctrines. ... If the sacrilegious and cursed custom of Mass is overthrown, then the whole must fall. Through me Christ has begun to reveal the abomination standing in the Holy Place (Dan. ix. 27), and to destroy him [the Papal Antichrist] who has taken up his seat there with the devils help, with false miracles and deceiving signs. (Grisar, Luther, Vol. II, pg 320 seqq., London Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., LTD., Broadway House, 68-74 Carter Lane, E.G., 1913)

His scheming was hidden from the faithful. It was difficult sometimes to recognize the differences in outward appearance. Yet, at Luther's direction the liturgy of the Mass was incrementally and imperceptibly altered, like the boiled frog with the heat slowly increased, the faithful didn't know they were embroiled in schism until they were poached. Later Luther was to brag,

“Thank God, in indifferent matters our churches are so arranged that a layman, whether Italian or Spaniard, unable to understand our preaching, seeing our Mass, choir, organs, bells, chantries, etc., would surely say that it was a regular papist church, and that there was no difference, or very little, between it and his own.” (Grisar, Luther, Vol. II, pg 322, London Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., LTD., Broadway House, 68-74 Carter Lane, E.G., 1913)

Luther has a big credibility gap with me, especially when I'm told that such is “God's word,” and “here I stand, here I take my seat, here I stay, here I triumph and laugh to scorn all Papists." I see Luther somewhat like Judas. After all is said and done, you never seem to grasp Luther's motivation. Was Luther a puppet acting out some play – to what end – what good came of it? You'll have to excuse me but I've just about settled on the conclusion that Luther lost his battle in his white washed cell tossing his “scheiss” at the devil (or black ink as some would tell us). Therefore, why should I hold the same theology gospel as a man that throws 'scheiss' at the demon that possess him? And you'll tell me a madman was biblically correct?


JoeT

[galveston]

I will not answer your rant on Luther, as I know very little about him.

My beliefs are based on Scripture.

So if you can't show me in the Bible where I err, then I conclude that you either don't know the Bible, or choose to ignore most of it.

The only Scripture passage that I have ever heard used to support the idea that Jesus founded the RCC is here:

Matt 16:18-19
18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
(KJV)

If you know of any other, I'll be glad to hear it.

Also, why would you think that the promise of the keys of the kingdom of heaven were given to Peter more than any other follower of Christ?

It is dangerous to build a theology on only one passage. All proper scriptural interpretation will agree with the whole revealed Word of God.

There are several passages of Scripture that show the error of the idea that Peter was the first Pope, or that the RCC was founded by Jesus.

The Church that Jesus founded is not an organization, it is a spiritual organism. It is made up of every one who believes on Jesus as Savior and Lord.

[JoeT777]

Re-form your question; I'm not sure what it is I'm suppose to provide scriptural proof for. I'm not in a location where I can do this now. I'll respond later tonight as long as Mrs. JoeT doesn't make me do the dishes tonight.

JoeT

[JoeT777]

God's Church,The Kingdom of God, i.e. the Mystical Body of Christ

The faithful in Christ know that apostolic teachings are important, as faith is believing in something yet unseen. Thus the intellect must know of the existence of the true Christ, His Messianic ministry, and His teachings before faith can work. “The law and the prophets were until John. From that time the kingdom of God is preached: and every one uses violence towards it.” (Luke 16:16-17). What do you think Christ meant? That the Kingdom would come and go? It's right here in the Catholic Church – more fully in the Roman Catholic Church. In this regard Catholics conform their beliefs to the God's Truth as taught by the Apostles. Truth is immutable, therefore if it is Truth for Peter, we can be assured it is Truth for us today, and it will be Truth for us tomorrow. If you ever wanted to use the precepts of Solo Scriptura as the rule of faith in discerning truth in Scripture, you still need these eight individual principles to 'measure' or validate truth we need to look to Scripture, Tradition, the Catholic Church, Councils, the Fathers, the Pope, miracles, and natural reasoning. But this sounds like 'Church.'

Private interpretations must be reformed to the doctrines of the Church. Those interpretations of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church have been jealously guarded by the Holy Spirit. Faithfull Christians of any stripe have an obligation to Christ to either 'sign-up' or like the rich man, walk away.

All of which is to say the Church forms our faith; it's not the object of our faith. In Holy Scripture we find no single verse or equally important a line of thought throughout Scripture that the Church is a body of like minded bible reading and believing people. Furthermore, logic would dictate, that if it were it there could only be ONE such body.

In trusting my eternal soul to the Catholic Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, the Kingdom of God, I am trusting in God's promise to Moses' covenant Kingdom who established an eternal Seat of authority. Where does this authority come from – yeah, I know, God – but to whom and when was this transfer of authority made. What was Christ's role in all this? Does this authority still exist, where's the seat? The Roman Catholic Church is 'The Kingdom of God' the seat of this authority. The Old Testament tells of the coming of the Kingdom in the Messianic age that even kings will serve and obey (Psalm 21:28 sq.; 2:7-12; 116:1; Zechariah 9:10). (Micah 4:1-2) “(Zechariah 14:8)

Prophecies in the Old Testament tell of a future Kingdom holding the authority in the rule of the Messiah; Psalms 2 and 71; Isaiah 9:6 sq.

Taking the seat of Moses, Christ is takes the office of High Priest of the Kingdom of God, “The Lord hath sworn, and he will not repent: Thou art a priest for ever according to the order of Melchisedech.” (Psalm 109:4) And that priesthood is institutionalized in the Kingdom, “For from the rising of the sun even to the going down, my name is great among the Gentiles, and in every place there is sacrifice, and there is offered to my name a clean oblation: for my name is great among the Gentiles, saith the Lord of hosts” (Malachi 1:11). The priesthood in this Messianic Kingdom is a continuation of the priesthood in the Old Testament with continued sacrificial offerings; “Thus saith the Lord: if my covenant, with the day can be made void, and my covenant with the night, that there should not be day and night in their season" (Jeremiah 33:20)

The importance of 'God's Kingdom' is that it is a direct connection with the Divine by which we are 'ruled' in our faith and love of God. Thereby, the only legitimate interpreter of Holy Scripture found in apostolic tradition.

On the other hand, we have another view (primarily Protestant) that canonical Scripture in itself is the only infallible basis for the rule of faith. Most Christians, other than Catholic, form distinct groups of likeminded sole judges of the rule of faith. Since each individual has the same rights there can be as many different measures in faith as there are non-Catholic denominations. This produces chaos in the order of faith, a state antithetical to moral order. One and only one faith can be representative of God's absolute truth. So we're left with the real question, which has Christ's Authority, and which doesn't?

Sometimes it's easier to see 'what is' by contrasting it with 'what isn't'. We see that Protestantism isn't 'one' faith and can never be 'one' given that each is the arbitrator of his own faith (Cf. John 17:11). This is the Tradition guarded, kept, and taught, one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic faith.

In contrast, we take God's Word as being immutable. God promises Moses a Kingdom; nowhere do we find a verse that terminates that Kingdom of God. What is found though is a transfer of power, “Therefore I say to you that the kingdom of God shall be taken from you and shall be given to a nation yielding the fruits thereof. And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it shall grind him to powder.” (Matt 21:43-44). So, Christ whose word is immutable is an Indian giver? He gives us the Church and then takes it up with Him at the Ascension? His very life was given for the Church as well as our redemption. He spent the better part of His ministry teaching the Twelve his Church.

The Jewish Kingdom was both a spiritual and temporal Kingdom of God with a priestly hierarchy, where the presence of God was veiled and only found in the Tabernacle. Mosses' sacrifices, different from the Christ's sacrifice, was given up to be consumed by God. Conversely Christ is sacrificed at the altar continually every day consuming us, bite by bite. (Cf. Tractates on the Gospel of John, CHAPTER 26,) newadvent.org/fathers/1701026.htm

Christ didn't overturn this Kingdom by creating a new one; in fact He couldn't because His ministry was the fulfillment of the Old Covenant, which included the Messianic Kingdom along with the prophecies for a new King. However what Christ was to do was to turn over the 'Key' of the Kingdom to a new tenant, what is today the gentile Kingdom we call the Roman Catholic Church. Its here we see Christ conquering the world in the Messianic vision of David; but instead of today's “nation building” it was then called Christ's “Kingdom” building.

Where is the Church's authority in scripture? The precepts for authority are in fact scriptural, the living memory of His words. The Church is constituted for the salvation of the faithful. Its claim as the Messianic Kingdom is the envy of the world. (Cf. Luke 4:21) Christ lays claim to His prophecy as Messianic King, in person, in his 'real presence'. If you will read your book, you'll see that Christ claims his universal Kingship in the New Solomon. (Matt 12:6). Lord over the Sabbath (Luke 6:5). The body is animated by the soul, as the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, is animated by its soul the Holy Spirit. When asked by non-Catholics, I explain, Yes, I do place my faith in the Catholic Church, particularly what you call the Roman Catholic Church. I receive in return a direct connection with the Divine, a guide and rule over my faith, along with the administrations of sacraments Christ ordained for His Kingdom of redemption.

Here lies the Church, in the heart, mind and soul; just down the street, around a corner or two. Her name is known to you as The Roman Catholic Church. In her is the Presence of Christ, as promised He is always with us.

JoeT

[arcura]

gromitt82,
Yes, my email has been changed.
I'll send you my new address.
Pax Christi,
Fred

[gromitt82]

JoeT & Galveston,
If you allow a member (who is not as bright as you two in debating such an important matter as salvation) to interfere let me just tell you that, in my humble opinion, those who stand the best chances of being saved, but not the certainty, are those who fulfil GOD's Law, whether Prostestans, Catholics, Ortodox or you name it!
Good Luck!
Gromitt82

[galveston]

Joe, there is only one fly in the ointment, and that is your insistence that THE CHURCH is the RCC.

My steadfast position is that the Church is an invisible, spiritual body, you know, like Jesus said about salt and leaven.

Otherwise, I find no problem with most of that post.

Fred, I know you don't quite understand it, but I KNOW what I know, and that is that my salvation is assured, as long as I do not turn my back on Jesus and go back into a life of sin.

I ain't going to do that.

[JoeT777]

JoeT & Galveston,
If you allow a member (who is not as bright as you two in debating such an important matter as salvation) to interfere let me just tell you that, in my humble opinion, those who stand the best chances of being saved, but not the certainty, are those who fulfil GOD's Law, whether Prostestans, Catholics, Ortodox or you name it!
Good Luck!
Gromitt82

Good point, which in a round-about way is mine. What I was suggesting is that the fullness of Divine Law is found in the Catholic Church. Hence, in order to wholly (completely – as much as humanly possible) fulfill God’s Law is to be Catholic as it is founded by Christ.

In my estimation, the guarantee found in Scripture is ‘Divine Justice.’ For some that might be a good outcome, for others that may be something else not-so-good. God judges as he wills, His findings are Just.


JoeT

[JoeT777]

Joe, there is only one fly in the ointment, and that is your insistence that THE CHURCH is the RCC.

My steadfast position is that the Church is an invisible, spiritual body, you know, like Jesus said about salt and leaven.

I'd suggest to cover your ointment if you have flies.

Are you suggesting that Christ put the “light of the world” under a basket; seems strange to me that the Church would be invisible? Why did Christ let John the Baptist run around saying the Kingdom of God was near-at-hand? How did the Apostles find out about the Church?

I'm not sure what salt and leaven have to do with a 'hidden Church'. Salt was used in every sacrifice by the Jew (Ezra 7:22). It was never mixed with a leaven, it spoiled the bread. (Cf. Lev 2).

Can you clear the salt thing up? While we do find references to salt and leaven, none which would suggest a secrete Church.

JoeT

PS, Salt seasons food and preserves things, usually foods. Christ uses salt to refer to the good earthly things, e.g. “ salt of the earth”. Leaven is used when referring to the Pharisees and was most always negative, e.g. puffed-up, pompous, and pretentious. But it also has another metaphoric meaning; such as to rise up from some unseen force. Consequently, you can see why I'm a bit confused when we see the allegoric use of the words by Pope Paul VI, especially when you use them for an invisible church:

But the Church knows that it is the seed, the leaven, the salt and light of the world. It sees clearly enough the astounding newness of modern times, but with frank confidence it stands upon the path of history and says to men: "I have that for which you search, that which you lack."

It does not hereby promise earthly felicity, but it does offer something--its light and grace--which makes the attainment as easy as possible; and then it speaks to men of their transcendent destiny. In doing this it speaks to them of truth, justice, freedom, progress, concord, peace and civilization. (His Holiness Pope Paul VI, Encyclical - Ways in which the Church Must Carry Out its Mission in the Contemporary World, August 6, 1964)

[galveston]

Luke 17:20-21
20 And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:
21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! Or, lo there! For, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.
(KJV)

Jesus and John have both already said that the Kingdom of heaven is at hand, but Jesus now says that it is within the believer, not external.

The individual believer is to let his light shine, so there is no hiding that light.

Some of all Christian disciplines will be in Heaven, I'm sure.

I'm also sure a lot of church members will not make it.

I also know that most Christians live far below their privileges in Christ.

Maranatha

[JoeT777]

Luke 17:20-21
And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. (KJV)

Jesus and John have both already said that the Kingdom of heaven is at hand, but Jesus now says that it is within the believer, not external.

What makes you think that? Would the Pharisees have understood that the Church was within them? How would, or could think, the Church of Jesus Christ IS within His enemies, those same said enemies of that Kingdom? Would Christ feed pearls to swine; do pigs fly? The plain text of this has been known for nearly 2,000 years, since Christ said these very words;

And being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God should come. (Luke 17: 20) Douay-Rheims. Christ’s words are directed at the Pharisees not to his followers, then or now. {I’m using the Douay-Rheims only because I have resources linked to certain verses.} It’s like a classic comedic movie scene - you know the punch line, before its said, but you die laughing anyway.

Close your eyes and envision, (wait - don’t close’em till you finish reading), Christ is addressing the Pharisees with Christ’s faithful mingled among the Pharisees. After all they’re both of Judah and the erudite Pharisees would grudgingly permitted closeness of the lowclass to their person. After all, one must stoop down once in awhile. This group of Pharisees sarcastically asks Christ, where this great and wondrous Kingdom of God hails from and where can they see it. All the while their great lofty aristocratic bearded head fain a mock search. Hand to forehead, they shade their eyes, looking with a mocking double-wide eyed stare into the heavens while swiveling heads turn – some heads may have actually turned more than 360 degrees, several times. Imagine that several elbows reaching for the funny bone, one or another pointing to the two boys playing in the street snidely says, “His Praetorian Guard, all that’s lacking is the Roman Aquila standard.“

But, Christ brings the jerks back to reality with a world slapping sober answer, “The kingdom of God comes not with observation. Neither shall they say: Behold here, or behold there,” after all those who are among the first of “the kingdom of God [are among] you”(Luke 17: 20-21). Look around you arrogant pips, there are no holier men in the world than in Kingdom of God which mingles with you right here. Behold where is there any holier than these among you? Behold here is the last of the Old Pharasiee who falsely claim holiness; behold the first of the next generation, these holy men among you.

Christ tell them, before the changing of the guard takes place and my standard replaces yours, I must first “be rejected by this generation. And as it came to pass in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.” (Luke 17:15-26) What a bunch of morons these Pharisees, because then a great tribulation will come to pass, like that of Noah’s. Those who look back on these times hearts will turn to stone like Lot’s wife (Cf. (Cf. Luke 17:27-36). Listen to what Christ says to the Pharisees, “Wheresoever the body [Church the Kingdom of God] shall be, thither will the eagles also be gathered together.” St. Jerome in his letter to Marcella (letter 46), tells us that these that follow Christ’s standard are legions of the holy, the holy priests, monks, and virgins, that march with greatness;

…they all assemble here and exhibit in this one city the most varied virtues. Differing in speech, they are one in religion, and almost every nation has a choir of its own. Yet amid this great concourse there is no arrogance, no disdain of self-restraint; all strive after humility, that greatest of Christian virtues. Whosoever is last is here regarded as first. Matthew 19:30 Their dress neither provokes remark nor calls for admiration. In whatever guise a man shows himself he is neither censured nor flattered. Long fasts help no one here. Starvation wins no deference, and the taking of food in moderation is not condemned. To his own master each one stands or falls. Romans 14:4 No man judges another lest he be judged of the Lord. Matthew 7:1 Backbiting, so common in other parts, is wholly unknown here. Sensuality and excess are far removed from us. And in the city there are so many places of prayer that a day would not be sufficient to go round them all. Here lies Christ’s equivalent of the Roman Standard; Before the Church marches the Aquila (eagle). This is His Kingdom, i.e. the Church.

Source: CHURCH FATHERS: Letter 46 (Jerome)

Individuals may be in heaven, but it will be those individuals that fight the spiritual war behind Aquila Standard of God, in His Holy Kingdom, the Roman Catholic Church.

JoeT

[classyT]

Joe, there is only one fly in the ointment, and that is your insistence that THE CHURCH is the RCC.

My steadfast position is that the Church is an invisible, spiritual body, you know, like Jesus said about salt and leaven.

Otherwise, I find no problem with most of that post.

Fred, I know you don't quite understand it, but I KNOW what I know, and that is that my salvation is assured, as long as I do not turn my back on Jesus and go back into a life of sin.

I ain't gonna do that.

Gal... never say never! Your flesh is always with you... besides... SALVATION is of the Lord. There are no conditions.. My natural self is capable of anything... but I choose to surrender to HIM. Some days I wake up with emotions and feelings that perhaps make me less likely to surrender... or because I am like the simple minded SHEEP I forget. But Salvation IS of the LORD... I didn't earn it and I can't keep it. Last I checked HE is the AUTHOR and FINISHER of my faith.so... from what I can tell all MY righteousness are as filthy rags. EVEN as a saved chickidee... they are filthy. I am ONLY made the righteousness of Christ by being place IN HIM... one last time... SALVATION is OF the Lord.

[classyT]

Fred,

When do you think he established the Chruch?